*This is the fourth in a series of blog posts that examines seven FAQs issued by the DOJ in response to questions the Yates Memo raised. The third of these questions concerns what a company is not required to do to earn cooperation credit. Question: What is the cooperating company not required to do? Answer: In order to receive cooperation credit, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has placed certain formal limitations on the Yates Memo’s reach. For instance, a company is not required to embark on an endless fishing expedition for information, nor is a company required to waive any attorney-client privilege to receive cooperation credit. At times, however, although there are formal limitations, the department’s limitations create an apparent conflict with its practical application. First, the department has placed some limitations on the scope of the investigation required to receive the cooperation credit. At a conference shortly after the Yates Memo was released, former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates stated that the memo was not intended to require “companies to embark on a years-long, multimillion dollar investigation every time a company learns of misconduct.” Instead, the company’s investigation should be “tailored to the scope of the wrongdoing” and put forth the company’s “best effort to determine the facts with the goal of identifying the individuals involved.” Second, the DOJ has made clear that cooperation credit is not contingent on waiving either the attorney-client or work product privilege. Former Deputy Attorney General Yates confirmed that “there is nothing in the new policy that requires companies to waive attorney-client privilege or in any way rolls back the protections that were built into the prior factors.” In fact, the department explicitly prohibits and deters a prosecutor from making the disclosure of attorney work product a condition for receiving corporation credit. However, as Yates said, this is “nothing new.” Since 2008, when the Filip Memo was released, companies have only been required to turn over relevant, “non-privileged” information about the misconduct to receive cooperation credit. In that same conference previously mentioned, Yates offered guidance on what the DOJ considers privileged material and non-privileged material for cooperation credit: As we all know, legal advice is privileged. Facts are not. If a law firm interviews a corporate employee during an investigation, the notes and memos generated from that interview may be protected, at least in part, by attorney-client privilege or as attorney work product. The corporation need not produce the protected material in order to receive cooperation credit and prosecutors will not request it. But to earn cooperation credit, the corporation does need to produce all relevant facts –including the facts learned through those interviews—unless identical information has already been provided. We will respect the privilege, but we will also expect companies to respect its boundaries and not to wrongly exploit its legitimate purpose by using it to shield non-privileged information from investigators.
Practically speaking, the Yates Memo may induce many corporations to waive its attorney-client privilege when conducting an internal investigation to ensure it receives the credit. However, before doing so, a company would be wise to consider not only the ramifications in future criminal and civil proceedings when making such a disclosure to a federal agency, but also the ramifications with its own employees. Third, the department does not require a corporation to fire, layoff, penalize or take any other specific action against employees to receive cooperation credit. However, with the same breath the DOJ makes clear that the “corporation’s response to misconduct says much about its willingness to ensure that such misconduct does not recur.” As a result, it is possible corporations may err on the side of taking actions against employees it believes are responsible for the misconduct. Therefore, the Yates Memo creates this tension between the employer and the employee, which could inhibit the corporation’s ability to gain information during its investigation from those arguably most knowledgeable. Last, a corporation is not required to refrain from entering into Joint Defense Agreements (JDA). The department has made clear that the mere participation in a JDA “does not render the corporation ineligible to receive cooperation credit” and even prohibits prosecutors from requesting the corporation not enter into a JDA. On the other hand, the DOJ advises that a corporation may want to “avoid putting itself in the position of being disabled . . . from providing some relevant facts to the government thereby limiting its ability to seek such cooperation credit.” Therefore, while the act of entering into a JDA does not disqualify a corporation from receiving credit, the practical applications are potentially debilitating to entering into a meaningful JDA with a target or subject of an investigation. Here, once again, we see the dichotomous relationship between the department’s limitation to the Yates Memo and its practical application for corporations seeking cooperation credit. So, what are the practical applications of these “non-requirements” for companies? Consider the phrase “reading between the lines.” While the department doesn’t explicitly require a company to take any of the steps listed above, they likely have incentive to do so. Check back soon for more in depth analysis and best practices in response to the FAQs.RELATED ARTICLES
DOJ Issues Expedited FCPA Opinion, Shows Willingness to Communicate With Requestors
February 7, 2022 | The GEE Blog, FCPA, Department of Justice
The Enforcement Climate is Changing for ESG Disclosures
January 26, 2022 | Environmental, The GEE Blog
Scope of DOJ’s Enforcement of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act After Van Buren
June 30, 2021 | The GEE Blog, Department of Justice
DOJ Targets COVID-19 Fraud With Coordinated, Multi-District Law Enforcement Action
June 2, 2021 | The GEE Blog, Department of Justice
Analyzing Price Gouging Under the Federal Defense Production Act
September 8, 2020 | The GEE Blog, Department of Justice
DOJ Issues Expedited FCPA Opinion, Shows Willingness to Communicate With Requestors
February 7, 2022 | The GEE Blog, FCPA, Department of Justice
The Enforcement Climate is Changing for ESG Disclosures
January 26, 2022 | Environmental, The GEE Blog
Scope of DOJ’s Enforcement of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act After Van Buren
June 30, 2021 | The GEE Blog, Department of Justice
DOJ Targets COVID-19 Fraud With Coordinated, Multi-District Law Enforcement Action
June 2, 2021 | The GEE Blog, Department of Justice
Analyzing Price Gouging Under the Federal Defense Production Act
September 8, 2020 | The GEE Blog, Department of Justice
DOJ’s First FCPA Opinion Release in Six Years Highlights Long-Standing Principles
August 21, 2020 | The GEE Blog, FCPA
Don’t Overthink It! Advocate for Easy to Understand Jury Instructions to Effectively Communicate Your Case
May 17, 2018 | Government Investigations, Jury Instructions, The GEE Blog
Don't Let DOJ Defections Fool You: Corporate Conduct Still in the Crosshairs
September 6, 2017 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question 7
May 1, 2017 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question 6
April 27, 2017 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question 5
April 25, 2017 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question 4 (Part 2)
April 7, 2017 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question 4 (Part 1)
April 4, 2017 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
DOJ’s Corporate Compliance Program Guidance Provides Succinct Resource for Companies
March 31, 2017 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
Recently Announced: DOJ Will Extend the FCPA Pilot Program
March 28, 2017 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question 2
March 21, 2017 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers: Question No. 1
March 17, 2017 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
The Yates Memo – DOJ Issues Questions and Answers
March 15, 2017 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
Department of Justice Rolls Out FCPA Enforcement Pilot Program
April 8, 2016 | Department of Justice, FCPA, The GEE Blog
DOJ Launches Targeted Elder Justice Task Forces
April 1, 2016 | Government Investigations, The GEE Blog
A New Approach: DOJ Antitrust Division in Wake of Yates Memo
March 23, 2016 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
DOJ Leaves Much Unsaid After Announcing Need for Corporate Certifications to Finalize Settlements
March 8, 2016 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
The “Other Yates Memo:” DOJ to Enhance Workplace Safety Violation Prosecutions by Tacking On More Severe Charges Where Possible
February 8, 2016 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
“Hide No Harm Act Of 2015” Targets Employers, Directors and Officers
November 5, 2015 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT POLICY CHANGE TARGETS CORPORATE EXECUTIVES
September 11, 2015 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
What the DOJ Expects of 'Effective' Compliance Programs
August 12, 2015 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
U.S. v. Sigelman: Another FCPA Enforcement Setback for the DOJ
June 25, 2015 | FCPA, The GEE Blog
Justice Department Guidelines Seek to Focus Enforcement of Structuring Law on Most Serious Cases
June 8, 2015 | Department of Justice, The GEE Blog
THE BENEFITS OF COOPERATION – HYPERDYNAMICS AVOIDS INDICTMENT
May 29, 2015 | FCPA, The GEE Blog
RENEWED GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE IN ATTORNEY FEE ARRANGEMENTS?
May 28, 2015 | Government Investigations, The GEE Blog
Extradition from Japan: The Gamble
May 5, 2015 | Government Investigations, The GEE Blog
Self-Reporting: A Wise Strategy or Chasing Unicorns?
April 28, 2015 | SEC, The GEE Blog
Top 10 Takeaways from ABA White Collar Crime Conference 2015 (Part 2)
March 18, 2015 | The GEE Blog
Top 10 Takeaways from ABA White Collar Crime Conference 2015 (Part 1)
March 17, 2015 | The GEE Blog
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL URGES COMPANIES TO COOPERATE AND CONDUCT THOROUGH INTERNAL INVESTIGATIONS OF FCPA VIOLATIONS
November 21, 2014 | FCPA, The GEE Blog
Bio-Rad Settlement Reinforces FCPA Trends
November 7, 2014 | FCPA, SEC, The GEE Blog
A Cozy Relationship: The DOJ and JFTC, and the Potential Risks of Taking Advantage of JFTC’s Leniency Program
October 31, 2014 | Government Investigations, The GEE Blog
Supreme Court Passes on Esquenazi, Makes Instrumentality Test Settled Law
October 6, 2014 | FCPA, The GEE Blog
REDUCING THE COST OF FCPA MONITORING
June 11, 2014 | Bank Securities Fraud, The GEE Blog
Honest Services Fraud, Ray Nagin & "Big Easy" Money
March 28, 2014 | Government Investigations, The GEE Blog
My Partner Left Me for the Government! DOJ’s First Opinion Procedure Release of 2014 Approves Buyout of Minority Shareholder-Turned-Government Official
March 25, 2014 | FCPA, The GEE Blog
D.C. District Court Order Provides a Warning About Attorney-Client Privilege Protection for Internal Investigations
March 20, 2014 | Internal Investigations, The GEE Blog
Heightened SEC/DOJ FCPA Standards Offer Risks and Opportunities to Companies and Their Lawyers
March 18, 2014 | Financial Regulation, The GEE Blog
Top 10 Takeaways from ABA White Collar Crime Conference 2014 (Part 2 of 2)
March 13, 2014 | Government Investigations, The GEE Blog
Top 10 Takeaways from ABA White Collar Crime Conference 2014 (Part 1 of 2)
March 12, 2014 | Government Investigations, The GEE Blog
The Department of Justice Continues to Bring the "HEAT" in Pursuing Health Care Fraud
March 5, 2014 | Government Investigations, The GEE Blog
The Position Of Assistant Attorney General For The Criminal Division May Be Filled In The Near Future
February 19, 2014 | The GEE Blog
DOJ Wins Big Insider Trading Case: Martoma Conviction; Bad News for Cohen and SAC
February 8, 2014 | Insider Trading, The GEE Blog
Going South: What U.S. Companies Need to Know About the FCPA and Doing Business in Latin America
January 30, 2014 | Criminal Procedure, Government Investigations, The GEE Blog
RELATED PRACTICE AREAS
Subscribe
Do you want to receive more valuable insights directly in your inbox? Visit our subscription center and let us know what you're interested in learning more about.
View Subscription Center